The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-4081MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff vs. Cumberland County Baz Association 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, PA 17013-3302 (717) 249-3166 SNELBA & BRENNEMAN, P.C. By A rneys for Plaintiff LEROY K. GORDON, KAREN E. GORDON :CIVIL ACTION -LAW and L & K RESTORATIONS, LLC, . . NO: 07_ X08( C ivi ~ Term Defendants NOTICE TO: Leroy K. Gordon, Karen E. Gordon and L & K Restorations LLC, Defendants You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appeazance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LAW OFFICES Date:.1~(y 9 , 2007 SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF SHOWPLACE, INC., :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff vs. LEROY K. GORDON, KAREN E. GORDON :CIVIL ACTION -LAW and L & K RESTORATIONS, LLC, Defendants COMPLAINT AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., by its attorneys, Snelbaker & Brenneman, P.C., and avers the following cause of action: 1. The Plaintiff is Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc., a corporation, having its offices at 1261 Clazemont Road, Carlisle (Middlesex Township), Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17015. 2. The individual Defendants aze Leroy K. Gordon and Kazen E. Gordon, individuals, husband and wife, who reside at 186 Booz Road, Shippensburg (Hopewell Township), Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, trading and doing business as the co-owners of L & K Restorations. 3. The entity Defendant is L & K RESTORATIONS, LLC, a limited liability company, having its principal place of business at 1120 Greenspring Road, Newville (North Newton Township), Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17241. 4. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was in the commercial business of selling, restoring, replicating and installing windows and doors. 5. In the early months of 2003, the individual Defendants decided to establish a LAW OFFICES II SNELBAKER & business operation to perform restoration and replication work, including performance of such BRENNEMAN, P.C. operations as a subcontractor to Plaintiff. 6. On or about May of 2003, the individual Defendants requested financial assistance from Plaintiff to commence said business and provide capital. In response thereto, Plaintiff orally agreed to lend funds to the Defendants. 7. On or about July 1, 2003, the Defendants created a limited liability company known as "L & K Restorations, LLC", the entity Defendant herein. 8. Subsequent to July 1, 2003, the entity Defendant assumed responsibility (jointly and severally with the individual Defendants) for the loan as averred in paragraph 6 above, paid Plaintiff on account thereof and orally agreed to repay all future funds loaned to Defendants by Plaintiff from monies received by the entity Defendant in its role as subcontractor of Plaintiff 9. At all times relevant hereto from and after July 1, 2003, Defendants operated the business which replicates and restores wooden window sash, doors, frames and moldings to meet historical requirements and prefinishes or paints interiors of windows and doors prior to installation. 10. Attached hereto as "Exhibit A" is a true and correct record of all amounts loaned by Plaintiff to Defendants and the amounts repaid by Defendants to Plaintiff. 11. Between May 19, 2003 and March 20, 2006, Plaintiff loaned the total amount of $127,624.85 by various advances to Defendants as indicated on "Exhibit A" attached hereto. 12. Between November 24, 2003 and July 19, 2006, Defendants repaid the total amount of $54,996.80 to Plaintiff on account of the loan as indicated on "Exhibit A" attached hereto. 13. Defendants' last payment to Plaintiff was July 19, 2006. LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER 8C BRENNEMAN, P.C. 2 14. Subsequent to July 19, 2006, Plaintiff made numerous periodic payments to Defendants for their restoration and replication work, but Defendants failed to make any payments on account of said loan. 15. The unpaid balance of the loan is $72,628.05, as indicated on "Exhibit A" attached hereto. 16. Plaintiff has demanded payment of the full unpaid balance of said loan. 17. Defendants have failed and refused to pay said full unpaid balance. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants jointly and severally in the amount of $72,628.05, together with interest thereon, plus the costs of this action. SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. By ~~-~-- 'char C. Snelbaker, Esquire Snelbaker & Brenneman, P.C. 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0318 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Plaintiff LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. Loan Advance Summary Between: Marvin Window & Door Showplace Inc. (MWDS) & L & K Restoration LLC. Loan Loan Loan Date: Check #: Paid to: Discription: Advances: Repayments: Balance: 5/19/2003 16437 Takeoff Inc. Startup material for L & K Rest. - 55 gallon strip liquid 17,038.05 17,038.05 5/9/2003 16348 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance 4,500.00 21,538.05 7/11/2003 16740 Attco Startup material for L & K Rest. -Construction of dip tanks 1,000.00 22,538.05 7/24/2003 16785 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance 3,000.00 25,538.05 8/15/2003 16930 Takeoff Inc. Startup material for L & K Rest. - 55 gallon strip liquid 17,565.00 43,103.05 11/24/2003 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,500.00 41,603.05 12!10/2003 MWDS Repaymentfrom L & K Restoration 1,500.00 40,103.05 12/11/2003 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 2,100.00 38,003.05 12/18/2003 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 2,200.00 35,803.05 4/9/2004 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 2,200.00 33,603.05 4/30/2004 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 800.00 32,803.05 5/26/2004 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 32,203.05 7/1/2004 19253 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance 8,000.00 40,203.05 7/7/2004 19289 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance 9,000.00 49,203.05 7/15!2004 19392 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #129 2,650.00 51,853.05 7/22/2004 19456 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #134 6,200.00 58,053.05 8/5/2004 19548 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #135 1,364.80 59,417.85 8/5/2004 19548 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #138 4,000.00 63,417.85 8/12/2004 19565 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #140 6,950.00 70,367.85 9/9/2004 19785 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #152 3,450.00 73,817.85 9/16/2004 19802 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #156 2,152.00 75,969.85 9!30/2004 19929 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #158 6,500.00 82,469.85 10/6/2004 19959 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #161 2,425.00 84,894.85 10/15/2004 20022 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #164 7,950.00 92,844.85 10/22/2004 20069 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance 4,800.00 97,644.85 11!5/2004 20210 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance 4,500.00 102,144.85 11/12/2004 20253 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L 8 K Restoration Inv. #173 3,730.00 105,874.85 12/3/2004 20341 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #188 875.00 106,749.85 12/9/2004 20422 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance - L & K Restoration Inv. #192 4,975.00 111,724.85 1/28/2005 1271 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 110,724.85 2/7/2005 1290 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 109,724.85 2/11/2005 1313 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 108,724.85 2/18/2005 1337 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 107,724.85 2/25/2005 1353 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 106,724.85 3/4/2005 1368 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 2,000.00 104,724.85 3/11/2005 1378 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 2,089.80 102,635.05 3/18/2005 1406 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 2,152.00 100,483.05 3/28/2005 1411 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 2,425.00 98,058.05 4/1/2005 1428 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,500.00 96,558.05 4/11/2005 1441 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,500.00 95,058.05 4/15/2005 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 94,058.05 4122!2005 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,500.00 92,558.05 4/2912005 1479 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 91,558.05 5/10/2005 1497 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 90,558.05 5/13!2005 1524 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 89,558.05 5/23/2005 1533 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 88,558.05 5/27/2005 1540 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 87,558.05 6!3/2005 1564 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 86,558.05 6/15/2005 1583 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 2,000.00 84,558.05 6/24/2005 1614 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 83,558.05 7/12/2005 1644 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 82,558.05 7/28/2005 1669 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 81,558.05 8/5/2005 1695 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 80,558.05 8/12/2005 1700 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 79,558.05 8/25/2005 1725 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 78,558.05 9/2/2005 1771 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,000.00 77,558.05 9/22/2005 1790 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 1,500.00 76,058.05 10/312005 1812 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 650.00 75,408.05 10/11/2005 1833 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 74,808.05 Page 1 of 2 F.XHTRTT A Loan Advance Summary Beiween: Marvin Window & Door Showplace Inc. (MWDS) & L 8~ K Restoration LLC. Loan Loan Loan Date: Check #: Paid to: Discription: Advances: Repayments: Balance: 10/21/2005 1858 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 74,208.05 10/28/2005 187 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 73,608.05 11/4/2005 1898 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 73,008.05 11/22/2005 192 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 72,408.05 11/28/2005 193 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 71,808.05 12/5/2005 1957 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 71,208.05 12/28/2005 1986 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 70,608.05 1/6/2006 2043 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 70,008.05 3/30/2006 23770 L & K Restoration Inc. Loan advance 5,000.00 75,008.05 5/26/2006 2060 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 74,408.05 6!712006 2113 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 580.00 73,828.05 6/29/2006 2091 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 73,228.05 7/19/2006 2010 MWDS Repayment from L & K Restoration 600.00 72,628.05 Totals 127,624.85 54,996.80 72,628.05 Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT A VERIFICATION I, ROBERT L. SLAGLE, do hereby certify that I am the/Yresedent of Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc., the Plaintiff in the foregoing Complaint, that the facts in the foregoing Complaint within my personal knowledge are true and correct and that with regard to facts received from others, I believe to be true and correct. I understand that any false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 PA C.S. §4904 rel~inlg to unsworn falsification to authorities. S Dated: July 3, 2007 LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. RJ ~~ WJ r 1.~~ t ~.~ ~ ' i,T~ , _ . V T.) ' -- ~,.~ u, °~ < IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant v. Civil Action -Law L&K RESOTRATIONS, LLC, LEROY K. GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs v. LIGHTSTYLES, INC., Additional Counterclaim Defendant No. 07-4081 Hon. PRAECIPE To the Prothonotary: Please file the enclosed Answer and Counterclaim in the above captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, Date: ~ ~5 v ~ ~I ~'-~,.~x~ ~~j James M. Stein, Attorney for Defendants Dick, Stein, Schemel, Wine & Frey, LLP 13 West Main Street, Suite 210 Waynesboro, Pennsylvania 17268 (717) 762-1160 PA Bar No. 8402b ~~ ~ -`: ~" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ;`fly _ -rr w~ iT~. y_ _ O ,(_' '^~`j ~ ' T ~ ~^' ~ 1~ y ~3 :~ fTl "-C - .17 fi,,,~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR Civil Action -Law SHOWPLACE, INC., ; Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant v. L&K RESOTRATIONS, LLC, No. 07-4081 LEROY K. GORDON and : KAREN E. GORDON, ; Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs v. : LIGHTSTYLES, INC., ; Additional Counterclaim Defendant Hon. NOTICE TO PLEAD TO: Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. & Lightstyles, Inc. You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claims or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. LEGAL REFERRALS PA Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service (800) 692-7375 (PA only) (717) 238-6715 Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 The Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County is required by law to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations available to disabled individuals having business before the Court, please contact our office. All arrangements must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the Court. You must attend the scheduled conference or hearing. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR Civil Action -Law SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant v. L&K RESOTRATIONS, LLC, No. 07-4081 LEROY K. GORDON and : KAREN E. GORDON, : Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs v. LIGHTSTYLES, INC., Additional Counterclaim Defendant Hon. ANSWER & COUNTERCLAIM COME NOW the above named Defendants, by and through their undersigned attorney, and for their Answer to the Plaintiff's Complaint state to the Court as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. The allegations set forth in Paragraph 8 contain legal conclusions for which no answer is required. To the extent that an answer is required, the Defendants deny that any of the Defendants agreed to joint and several liability with any of the other Defendants, and further deny that there was ever any specific agreement between the Plaintiff and any of the Defendants with regard to repayment of said funds. 9. Admitted. 10. Denied. The Defendants deny that Plaintiff's Exhibit "A" is a true and correct record of amounts loaned and repaid. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 11. Denied. The Defendants deny that the total amount loaned was $127,624.85 for the reasons set forth in Defendants' New Matter below. 12. Denied. Defendants actually repaid a total of $113,031.80. 13. Denied. Defendants' last payment occurred on February 8, 2006. 14. Admitted. By way of further answer, the Defendants admit that they have made no payments, actually since February 8, 2006, because the loan had been repaid in full. 15. Denied. As indicated above, the loan has been paid in full. 16. Defendants admit that Plaintiff has made such a demand. Defendants deny that there is any unpaid balance due and owing. 17. Admitted for the reasons set forth above. NEW MATTER 1. - 17. Counterclaim Plaintiffs hereby incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 17 of their Answer to the Plaintiffls Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 18. The Defendants dispute that the following amounts were loaned to them: 5/19/2003 -Start-Up Material - 55 Gallon Strip Liquid - $17,038.05 5/9/2003 -Loan Advance - $4,500.00 7/11/2003 -Start-Up Material -Construction of Dip Tanks - $1,000.00 8/15/2003 -Start-Up Material - 55 Gallon Strip Liquid - $17,565.00 -2- Defendants assert that said amounts were purchased for Attco, Inc., and were to be repaid by Attco. 19. This disputed amount totals $40,103.05. Consequently, the amount loaned totals $87,521.80. 20. The Defendants have actually paid the Plaintiff $113,031.80, resulting in an overpayment of $25,510.00. 21. The Defendants owe the Plaintiff no money, but rather the Plaintiff owes the Defendants a substantial sum as set forth in the Counterclaim below. WHEREFORE, the Defendants respectfully request that the Court dismiss the Plaintiff s claim and grant the Counterclaim set forth below. COUNTERCLAIM L&KRestorations Inc. v. Marvin Window do Door Show lace Inc. & Li hts les Inc. 1. - 21. Counterclaim Plaintiffs hereby incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 17 of their Answer to the Plaintiff's Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 22. As indicated in the Plaintiff's Complaint, the Counterclaim Plaintiff, L&K Restorations, LLC, is in the business of replicating and restoring wooden window sashes, doors, frames, and moldings to meet historical requirements, and also refinishing and painting interiors of windows and doors prior to installation. 23. In the course of its business, Counterclaim Plaintiff contracted with Counterclaim Defendant, Man~in Window & Door Showplace, Inc., and its parent company, Lightstyles, Inc. 24. Additional Counterclaim Defendant Lightstyles, Inc. is, upon information and belief, a North Carolina corporation, with a Pennsylvania business address of 1261 Claremont Road, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, 17015, and is in the business of retail and wholesale lighting. -3- 25. L&K Restorations acted as a subcontractor for the Counterclaim Defendants on various projects, whereby the Counterclaim Defendants requested that L&K Restorations perform work on various projects, beginning in July, 2003 and ending in June, 2007. 26. Throughout that time period, L&K Restorations provided work to the Counterclaim Defendants on an estimated basis. The parties orally agreed that the estimates would be reconciled at the conclusion of each job, allowing for either credit to the Counterclaim Defendants or further payment to L&K Restorations as determined by such reconciliation. 27. In late May, 2007, the Counterclaim Defendants requested such reconciliation from L&K Restorations. 28. L&K Restorations performed the reconciliation and provided the Counterclaim Defendants with information indicating that the unpaid balance for all projects totaled $540,703.65. 29. L&K Restorations has since discovered an error in its calculations, and has determined that the total amount due is $689,416.14. 30. L&K Restorations made written demand for said payment, along with providing copies of all invoices and signed shipping receipts to the Defendants, which information was received by the Defendants on July 23, 2007. 31. The Defendants have made no payments toward said amount, and have indicated that they have no intention to pay. 32. The Defendants' failure to pay said amount is a breach of the parties' oral agreement and course of conduct, and justifies an award of damages. -4- 33. The Counterclaim Defendants' institution of this lawsuit, despite their significant outstanding debt owed to L&K Restorations, is vexatious and obdurate in violation of 42 Pa. C.S. 2503(7), and justifies an award of attorney fees in favor of L&K Restorations, LLC. WHEREFORE, Counterclaim Plaintiff L&K Restorations, LLC respectfully requests that the Court deny the Plaintiff s Complaint and award L&K Restorations, LLC a total due of $689,416.14, plus interest, Court costs, and reasonable attorney fees to be proven at trial. COUNTERCLAIM Leroy K. Gordon v. Marvin Window c~ Door Showplace Inc 1. - 33. Counterclaim Plaintiffs hereby incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 33 above as if fully set forth herein. 34. Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff Leroy K. Gordon also served as an employee of Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. in the capacity of selling the company's services and estimating jobs. 35. On or about June 1, 2007, Mr. Gordon left the employ of Counterclaim Defendant Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. 36. Thereafter, Mr. Gordon demanded his remaining vacation pay in the amount of $2,250.00, reimbursement for outstanding expenses in the amount of approximately $1,200.00, and his sales commission in the approximate amount of $24,750.00. 37. Counterclaim Defendant Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. sent Mr. Gordon a check which purported to be for unused vacation in the amount of $1,250.00, and has refused to send the remainder of the vacation pay, the expenses, and the commission. -5- 38. Marvin's failure to deliver said funds to Mr. Gordon violates the verbal agreement between the parties regarding his compensation for employment, and also violates Pennsylvania labor law regarding wages. 43 Pa. C.S. 221, et seq. WHEREFORE, Counterclaim Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court award Mr. Gordon his unpaid vacation pay, expenses, and unpaid commission, along with such other penalties, interest and attorney fees as allowed by law, and such other relief as the Court deems just and equitable in the premises. Respectfully submitted, Date: ~ 1 James M. Stein, Attorney for Defendants Dick, Stein, Schemel, Wine & Frey, LLP 13 West Main Street, Suite 210 Waynesboro, Pennsylvania 17268 (717) 762-1160 PA Bar No. 84026 -6- f~ 003/003 ` 'Rue. 8. 2001 11:50~M CM( ~ ~ No~05&4 N, y 'VERI~TCAT'ION I vexify that the staternetris made in the foregoing pleading are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, infoz~onation and belie; Z understand that false statements herein are madE subject to the penatdes of 1 S Pa. C.S., Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: __~~~~~~ La160~- K. Gbrd6n, Defendant ROOF CE I HEREBY VERIFY that I k~avc served the ~orcgoing docw~nent upon counsel of record by depositing one (I) true and con~ect copy thereof in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, addxe9ged as follows: Richazd C. Snelbaker, Esquire Snelbaker & Bxcnnexnan, P.C. P.O. $ox 318 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, pA 17055-0318 Date: ~~~~0 7 7 - ~1 ~~~ James M. Stein, Attoraey for Defendaats .~. CJ '~'' .-~ C~ c` `R~' ~= - R~ ~ f ~- r ,,_r, _,c-, .~-; _. ~' - .. ~ ~~' c ~ ~ : SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR • CASE NO: 2007-04081 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE VS CORDON LEROY K ET AL WILLIAM CLINE Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon L&K RESTORATIONS LLC the DEFENDANT at 0800:00 HOURS, on the 3rd day of August 2007 at 1120 GREENSPRING ROAD NEWVILLE, PA 17241 by handing to LEROY CORDON, ADULT IN CHARGE a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 00 ~), s~n~ ~,,_ 16. o0 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day of , So Answers: ~~ ~~~ P R. Thomas Kline 08/06/2007 SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN By. Deputy Sheriff A.D. SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR ~ CASE NO: 2007-04081 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE VS GORDON LEROY K ET AL WILLIAM CLINE Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon GORDON LEROY K the DEFENDANT at 0800:00 HOURS, on the 3rd day of August 2007 at 1120 GREENSPRING ROAD NEWVILLE, PA 17241 LEROY K GORDON by handing to a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 34.56 Postage .58 Surcharge 10.00 .00 ~~-S)69~ 63.14 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day of , So Answers: P R. Thomas Kline 08/06/2007 SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN By De uty Sheriff A.D. SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR ~' CASE NO: 2007-04081 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE VS CORDON LEROY K ET AL WILLIAM CLINE Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon CORDON KAREN E the DEFENDANT at 0800:00 HOURS, on the 3rd day of August 2007 at 1120 GREENSPRING ROAD NEWVILLE, PA 17241 by handing to KAREN E CORDON a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 6.00 Service .00 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 ~~ Ldlcl ~ 16.0 0 Sworn and Subscibed to before me this day So Answers: 7 .. :.~ R. Thomas Kline 08/06/2007 SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN By: pu y Sheriff of A.D. .VIN WINDOW & DOOR ~VPLACE, INC., Plaintiff vs. ;OY K. GORDON, KAREN E. GORDON, L & K RESTORATIONS, LLC, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO: 07-4081 Defendants NOTICE TO PLEAD Leroy K. Gordon, Karen E. Gordon and L & K Restorations, LLC, Defendants You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed Plaintiff s New Matter thin twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. BY. chard C. Snelbaker, Esquire 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. Dated: August ,Z 3 , 2007 LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER SC BRENNEMAN. P.C. WINDOW & DOOR IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ACE, INC., :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff vs. :OY K. GORDON, KAREN E. GORDON :CIVIL ACTION -LAW L & K RESTORATIONS, LLC, NO: 07-4081 Defendants PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO NEW MATTER AND COUNTERCLAIM WITH PLAINTIFF'S NEW MATTER AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc., by its attorneys, baker & Brenneman, P.C., and responds to Defendants' New Matter and Counterclaim as 1. - 17. Plaintiff denies all the incorporated averments for the reasons set forth in the ing paragraphs of Plaintiff's Complaint, the averments of which are incorporated by reference thereto. 18. It is denied that the four (4) amounts in Defendants' New Matter were purchased for Attco, Inc., and to be repaid by Attco, Inc. On the contrary, the purchase of Strip Liquid and of Dip Tanks was done at the request of and for the sole benefit of Defendants in commencement of their restoration and replication business, said items of property being by Defendants. It is further averred that the Loan Advance of $4,500 was cash paid to Defendant L & K Restorations, LLC, for operating and/or capital business commencement (purposes. Plaintiff had no contractual arrangement with Attco, Inc. LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER SC BRENNEMAN, P.C. 19. It is denied that $40,103.05 was not part of the overall loan to Defendants. On the the averments in paragraph 18 hereinabove are incorporated herein by reference thereto way of further response. 20. It is denied that Defendants have paid $113,031.80 on account of the overall loan bligation and that an overpayment exists in any amount. On the contrary, Defendants have paid $54,996.80 on account of said loan and that $72,628.05 remains unpaid, all as averred in laintiff s Complaint which is incorporated herein by reference thereto. 21. It is denied that Defendants owe Plaintiff no money. On the contrary, Defendants Plaintiff $72,628.05 (plus interest and costs}, as averred in Plaintiff's Complaint, the of which are incorporated herein by reference thereto. It is further denied that iff is obligated to Defendants for any of the amounts set forth in their Counterclaims for the set forth hereinbelow, the averments of which are incorporated herein by reference WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the Court to enter judgment in accordance with the Complaint. REPLY TO COUNTERCLAIM #1 1-21. Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) denies all incorporated averments for the LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER EC BRENNEMAN, P.C. reasons set forth in the corresponding paragraphs of Plaintiff s Complaint and its Reply to New Matter hereinabove, the averments of the latter pleadings being incorporated herein by reference I thereto. 22. Admitted. 2 23. It is admitted that L & K Restorations contracted with Plaintiff (Counterclaim in the manner alleged in the Complaint. It is denied that "Lightstyles, Inc." is the company of Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant). On the contrary, Plaintiff (Counterclaim is an independent corporation having no "parent company." Further, Plaintiff Counterclaim Defendant) has no knowledge of "Lightstyles, Inc." 24. It is denied that "Lightstyles, Inc." has a business address at 1261 Claremont Carlisle, Pennsylvania, 17015, and that any retail or wholesale lighting business exists at address. Further, Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) has no knowledge of a North Carolina conducting any business at the address indicated. 25. It is admitted that L & K Restorations, LLC, acted as such subcontractor for Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant). It is denied that L & K Restorations, LLC, acted. as bcontractor with any other person affiliated in any manner with Plaintiff (Counterclaim 26. For all the reasons averred in paragraphs 23-25 hereinabove, it is denied that L & K Restorations, LLC, provided .any work to any other entity affiliated with Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant). It is further denied that the characterization of the parties' contract and course of dealing was as stated in paragraph 26. On the contrary, L & K Restorations, LLC, provided a single sum certain price to perform subcontract work for Plaintiff (fixed Counterclaim Defendant) for each of the latter's projects, for which Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) made periodic payments frequently in advance of the performance of work to accommodate the cash needs of L & K Restorations, LLC, and its individual owners, Leroy K. and Karen E. Gordon. It LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER & is specifically denied that the parties operated on an estimated basis. BRENNEMAN, P.C. 27. Denied as stated. On the contrary, in May 2007, Plaintiff (Counterclaim requested a budget report for a specific project to wit: the "Lorton Project", in its to determine the monetary value of the subcontract work yet to be performed and to obtain & K Restoration's computation of the balance remaining of the contract price. It is denied that "reconciliation" of any kind was requested, and it is further denied that an overall budget report all projects was requested. 28. It is denied that L & K Restorations, LLC, submitted the requested budget report averred in paragraph 27 hereinabove. On the contrary, L & K Restorations, LLC, submitted alleged billing for all projects. It is denied that said billing was for $540,703.65. On the pry, the total billing submitted in late May 2007 was $531,703.65. Plaintiff (Counterclaim ~dant) categorically denies that it is obligated to L & K Restorations, LLC in either amount. 29. After reasonable investigation, Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is without ledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph of the Counterclaim and, therefore, the same are deemed to be denied pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1029 (c), proof of which are demanded at the trial of the case. 30. It is admitted that demand for payment of $689,416.14 has been made. and that various documents alleged to support the demand were received on July 23, 2007. It is denied the amount demanded is owed. 31. Admitted. By way of further response, it is averred that the amount demanded is not owed. 32. It is denied that Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) has breached the parties' LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER & agreement and/or course of conduct. On the contrary, the claims of L & K Restorations, LLC, BRENNEMAN, F.C. 4 are false. The content of paragraph 32 of the Counterclaim contains only conclusions of law to no response is required and, therefore, is deemed to be denied. 33. It is denied that Plaintiff's (Counterclaim Defendant) institution of the original action was vexatious or obdurate, and further denied that any debt is owed to L & K Restorations, LLC. On the contrary, Plaintiff's original action is based on fact and law to funds duly loaned and remaining unpaid. The content of paragraph 33 of the im contains only conclusions of law to which no response is required and, therefore, is to be denied. NEW MATTER TO COUNTERCLAIM #1 By way of further response and defense to Counterclaim #1, Plaintiff (Counterclaim ant) avers the following New Matter: A. Leroy K. Gordon and Karen E. Gordon are the owners of L & K Restorations, C. B. At all times relevant to the business dealings between the parties, Leroy K. Gordon was employed by Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc., (Plaintiff) as the Project Manager for the commercial projects in which L & K restorations, LLC, performed subcontract and replication work. C. As Project manager, Leroy K. Gordon assisted Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) composing bids resulting in contracts with the general contractors of the various projects. D. In the course of assisting as aforesaid, Leroy K. Gordon submitted firm lump sum LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER 8C BRENNEMAN, P.C. Mixed prices to Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) for the work to be performed by L & K Restorations, LLC. 5 E. In negotiating contract prices with the general contractors of projects, Plaintiff ;Counterclaim Defendant) relied upon the prices submitted as averred in paragraph D. F. The Counterclaim fails to state a cause of action upon which the relief sought can granted. G. Counterclaim Plaintiffs (L & K Restorations, LLC's) institution of the foregoing is vexatious and obdurate in violation of 42 Pa. C.S. 2503 (7) and justifies an of attorney fees in favor of Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) requests the Court to deny and the Counterclaim of L & K Restorations, LLC, and to enter judgment in accordance with demand of Plaintiff s Complaint, and to award reasonable attorney fees to Plaintiff ;Counterclaim Defendant) against the Counterclaim Plaintiff and all original Defendants. REPLY TO COUNTERCLAIM #2 1. - 33. Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) denies all incorporated averments for the set forth in the corresponding paragraphs of Plaintiff's Complaint and in its Reply to New Matter and Reply to Counterclaim #1 hereinabove, the averments of all such responsive pleadings being incorporated herein by reference thereto. 34. Admitted. By way of further response, it is averred that Leroy K. Gordon served LAW OFFlCES SNELBAKER ~C BRENNEMAN,P.C. as project Manager of commercial projects with overall responsibility for fulfillment of the contracts of Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant). 35. Admitted. 6 36. Admitted. 'The admission of the averment of demand cannot be construed as the of the truth of its content, all of which is denied for the reasons more fully set forth in ew Matter hereinbelow, the averments of which are incorporated herein by reference thereto. It specifically denied that Mr. Gordon's compensation included any "sales commissions." As in New Matter below, he could earn a bonus from realized profits for successful lion of projects in which he served as Project Manager. 37. Admitted. The admission of the averment of refusal to pay the alleged. unpaid bligations cannot be construed to be an admission of the truth of the existence of such bligations, all of which is denied for the reasons more fully set forth in New Matter the averments of which are incorporated herein by reference thereto. 38. It is denied that Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) has violated any agreement the compensation for Leroy K. Gordon and it is further denied that it has violated any lvania Labor Law. It is noted that Leroy K. Gordon has failed to plead the terms of any compensation agreement or the manner in which any labor law has been violated. NEW MATTER TO COUNTERCLAIM #2 By way of further answer and defense to Counterclaim #2, Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) avers the following New Matter: AA. Leroy K. Gordon has failed to plead a cause of action in Counterclaim #2 upon which the relief sought can be granted. BB. Leroy K. Gordon was employed by Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) as Project LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER SC BRENNEMAN, P.C. Manager of its commercial projects. Among his duties, he was required to oversee, manage and satisfactorily complete each project to which he was assigned. 7 CC. As part of his employment agreement, Leroy K. Gordon could earn a bonus for the successful completion of projects on which he was the Project Manager. There was no for the payment of "sales commission." DD. Without any prior notice, Leroy K. Gordon resigned from his employment by E- to Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) dated May 31, 2007. EE. At the time of his resignation, various projects were still in progress and not successfully completed. FF. In addition to not completing his Project Manager duties, Leroy K. Gordon caused is company, L & K Restorations, LLC, to retain and withhold materials needed on the ects, causing substantial loss of production and considerable presently monetary expense and loss, and requiring Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) to replevin actions to retrieve the materials in order to mitigate its losses, all at considerable expense. See actions filed in this Court to No. 07-3906 Civil Term, and No. 07-4471 Civil GG. Because of his failure to successfully complete the various projects, Leroy K. has not met the criteria for payment of any bonus. HH. All legitimate expenses incurred by Leroy K. Gordon and submitted to Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) for reimbursement have been paid. II. All legitimate unused vacation has been paid to Leroy K. Gordon via the payment $1,250 as averred in the Counterclaim. JJ. The actions of Leroy K. Gordon in abandoning his Project Manager duties in LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER & breach of his employment agreement and interfering with the performance of projects by BRENNEMAN, P.C. ing materials in breach of the subcontracts by L & K Restorations, LLC, as averred 8 has resulted in substantial monetary losses, some of which are yet to be realized, to (Counterclaim Defendant). WHEREFORE, Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) requests the Court to dismiss Leroy Gordon's Counterclaim and enter judgment thereon against Leroy K. Gordon and in favor of Window & Door Showplace, Inc., for the losses it has and will sustain as averred together with interest, costs and Plaintiff's (Counterclaim Defendant's) reasonable fees. SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. By 'chard C. Snelbaker, Esquire 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER EC BRENNEMAN. P.C. 9 VERIFICATION I, ROBERT L. SLAGLE, do hereby certify that I am the Vice-president of Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc., the Plaintiff in the foregoing Plaintiff's Reply to New Matter nd Counterclaim with Plaintiff's New Matter, that the facts in the foregoing Reply and New atter within my personal knowledge are true and correct and that with regard to facts received from others, I believe to be true and correct. I understand that any false statements made herein I are subject to the penalties of 18 PA C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. I Dated: August ~ 3 , 2007 LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER SC BRENNEMAN, P.G. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this date serving a true and correct copy of the within Plaintiff's to New Matter and Counterclaim with Plaintiff's New Matter upon the attorney for by sending the same by first-class mail, postage paid addressed as follows: James M. Stein, Esquire Dick, Stein, Schemel, Wine & Frey, LLP 13 West Main Street (Suite 210) Waynesboro, PA 17268 'c C. Snelbaker, Esquire Snelbaker & Brenneman, P.C. 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Attorneys for Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. Date: August ~3 , 2007 LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER 8C BRENNEMAN, P. C. r~ C~ ~; , `+`t - _ --~~ .. t 4 2'''r_ ` UJ _ .. '~ r .: 3 ~ ~. .~ ~~~ 't ' y- % ~ .,~ C::: "'~ SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2007-04081 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE VS GORDON LEROY K ET AL CPL RICHARD SMITH Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within NOTICE, ANSWER & COUNTERC was served upon LIGHTSTYLES INC DEFENDANT the at 1408:00 HOURS, on the 23rd day of August 2007 at 1261 CLAREMONT ROAD CARLISLE, PA 17015 by handing to LARRY MORRIS (SALES REP) a true and attested copy of NOTICE, ANSWER & COUNTERC together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 4.80 Postage .41 Surcharge 10.00 .00 4~~.4IbZ ~ 33.21 So Answers: ~~ .~...,...t /• R. Thomas Kline 08/24/2007 DICK STEIN S Sworn and Subscibed to By: before me this day of A.D. WINE & FREY ty S SHERIFF'S RETURN - NOT FOUND CASE NO: 2007-04081 P Amended COMMONTWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE VS GORDON LEROY K ET AL R. Thomas Kline ,Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff, who being duly sworn according to law, says, that he made a diligent search and inquiry for the within named DEFENDANT LIGHTSTYLES INC but was unable to locate Them in his bailiwick. He therefore returns the NOTICE ANSWER & COUNTERCLAIM the within named DEFENDANT LIGHTSTYLES INC 1261 CLAREMONT ROAD NOT FOUND , as to CARLISLE, PA 17015 BUSINESS LOCATED AT ADDRESS PROVIDED IS THAT OF LIGHTSTYLES, LTD Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service POSTAGE Surcharge NOT OUND RETURN g~b~.jo~ So answe _ , 18.0 0 --~'~` 4.80 /''~ .41 R. Thomas Kline 10.00 Sheriff of Cumberland County 5.00 3~ DICK, STEIN, SCHEMEL, WINE 08/29/2007 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of A.D. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARVIN 'WINDOW & DOOR Civil Action -Law SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant v. L&K RESOTRATIONS, LLC, No. 07-4081 LEROY K. GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs v. LIGHTSTYLES, INC., Additional Counterclaim Defendant Hon. MOTION TO AMEND ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM COME NOW the above named Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs, by and through their undersigned attorney, and for their Motion to Amend Answer and Counterclaim state to the Court as follows: 1. Counterclaim Plaintiffs filed the original Answer and Counterclaim against "Lightstyles, Inc.," believing that said name was correct. 2. Counterclaim Plaintiffs have since learned that the correct name is "Lightstyles, Ltd." 3. Consequently, the Counterclaim Plaintiffs wish to amend the Answer and Counterclaim to list the correct name of Lightstyles, Ltd. 4. On August 23, 2007, the Sheriff served the Answer and Counterclaim on Lightstyles at its registered address, but Lightstyles has not yet filed an Answer. 5. Consequently, undersigned counsel has not notified Counterclaim Defendants, Lightstyles, of this amendment because there is not yet any counsel of record. WHEREFORE, undersigned counsel respectfully requests that the Court allow the Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs to amend their Answer and Counterclaim in such a way that replaces all references to "Lightstyles, Inc." with "Lightstyles, Ltd." Respectfully submitted, Date: ~~~ n ~ ~ Gt~m-Fa ~1 - ~1~~-- 1 ~ James M. Stein, Attorney for Defendants Dick, Stein, Schemel, Wine & Frey, LLP 13 West Main Street, Suite 210 Waynesboro, Pennsylvania 17268 (717) 762-1160 PA Bar No. 84026 PROOF OF SERVICE I HEREBY VERIFY that I have served the foregoing document upon counsel of record by depositing one (1) true and correct copy thereof in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Richard C. Snelbaker, Esquire Counsel for Plaintiff Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. Snelbaker & Brenneman, P.C. P.O. Box 318 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0318 Date: g~3 o I o ~ J ~ ~ - ~.=, James M. Stein, Attorney for Defendants -2- IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant v. L&K RESOTRATIONS, LLC, LEROY K. GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs v. LIGHTSTYLES, LTD., Additional Counterclaim Defendant Civil Action -Law No. 07-4081 Hon. DEFENDANTS' AMENDED ANSWER, NEW MATTER & COUNTERCLAIM COME NOWthe-above named Defendants, by and through their undersigned attorney, and for their Answer to the Plaintiff's Complaint state to the Court as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. The allegations set forth in Paragraph $ contain legal conclusions for which no answer is required. To the extent that an answer is required, the Defendants deny that any of the Defendants agreed to joint and several liability with any of the other Defendants, and further deny that there was ever any specific agreement between the Plaintiff and any of the Defendants with regard to repayment of said funds. 9. Admitted. 10. Denied. The Defendants deny that Plaintiff's Exhibit "A" is a true and correct record of amounts loaned and repaid. Strict proof is demanded at trial. 11. Denied. The Defendants deny that the total amount loaned was $127,524.85 for the reasons set forth in Defendants' New Matter below. 12. Denied. Defendants actually repaid a total of $113,031.80. 13. Denied. Defendants' last payment occurred on February 8, 2005. 14. Admitted. By way of further answer, the Defendants admit that they have made no payments, actually since February 8, 2006, because the loan had been repaid in full. 15. Denied. As indicated above, the loan has been paid in full. 1 b. Defendants admit that Plaintiff has made such a demand. Defendants deny that there is any unpaid balance due and owing. 17. Admitted for the reasons set forth above. 1YER'MATTER 1. - 17. Counterclaim Plaintiffs hereby incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 17 of their Answer to the Plaintiff's Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 18. The Defendants dispute that the following amounts were loaned to them: 5/19/2003 -Start-Up Material - 55 Gallon Strip Liquid - $17,038.05 5/9/2003 -Loan Advance - $4,500.00 7/11/2003 -Start-Up Material - Construction of Dip Tanks - $1,000.00 8/15/2003 -Start-Up Material - 55 Gallon Strip Liquid - $17,565.00 -2- Defendants assert that said amounts were purchased for Attco, Inc., and were to be repaid by Attco. 19. This disputed amount totals $40,103.45. Consequently, the amount loaned totals $87,521.80. 20. The Defendants have actually paid the Plaintiff $113,031.80, resulting in an overpayment of $25,510.00. 21. The Defendants owe the Plaintiff no money, but rather the Plaintiff owes the Defendants a substantial sum as set forth in the Counterclaim below. WHEREFORE, the Defendants respectfully request that the Court dismiss the Plaintiff's claim and grant the Counterclaim set faith below. COUNTERCLAIM L&If Restorations. Inc v Marvin Window 8c Door Showplace Inc. & Liehtstyles. Ltu~ 1. - 21. Counterclaim Plaintiffs hereby incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 17 of their Answer to the Plaintiff's Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 22. As indicated in the Plaintiff s Complaint, the Counterclaim Plaintiff, L&K Restorations, LLC, is in the business of replicating and restoring wooden window sashes, doors, frames, and moldings to meet historical requirements, and also refinishing and painting interiors of windows and doors prior to installation. 23. In the course of its business, Counterclaim Plaintiff contracted with Counterclaim Defendant, Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc., and its parent company, Lightstyles, Ltd. 24. Additional Counterclaim Defendant Lightstyles, Ltd. is, upon information and belief, a Pennsylvania corporation, with a business address of 1261 Claremont Road, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, 17015, and is in the business of retail and wholesale lighting. -3- 25. L&K Restorations acted as a subcontractor for the Counterclaim Defendants on various projects, whereby the Counterclaim Defendants requested that L&K Restorations perform work on various projects, beginning in July, 2003 and ending in June, 2007. 26. Throughout that time period, L&K Restorations provided work to the Counterclaim Defendants on an estimated basis. The parties orally agreed that the estimates would be reconciled at the conclusion of each job, allowing for either credit to the Counterclaim Defendants or further payment to L&K Restorations as determined by such reconciliation. 27. In late May, 2007, the Counterclaim Defendants requested such reconciliation from L&K Restorations. 28. L&K Restorations performed the reconciliation and provided the Counterclaim Defendants with information indicating that the unpaid balance for all projects totaled $540,703.65. 29. L&K Restorations has since discovered an error in its calculations, and has determined that the total amount due is $689,416.14. 30. L&K Restorations made written demand for said payment, along with providing copies of all invoices and signed shipping receipts to the Defendants, which information was received by the Defendants on July 23, 2007. 31. The Defendants have made no payments towazd said amount, and have indicated that they have no intention to pay. 32. The Defendants' failure to pay said amount is a breach of the parties' oral agreement and course of conduct, and justifies an awazd of damages. -4- 33. The Counterclaim Defendants' institution of this lawsuit, despite their significant outstanding debt owed to L&K Restorations, is vexatious and obdurate in violation of 42 Pa. C.S. 2503(7), and justifies an award of attorney fees in favor of L&K Restorations, LLC. WHEREFORE, Counterclaim Plaintiff L&K Restorations, LLC respectfully requests that the Court deny the Plaintiff s Complaint and award L&K Restorations, LLC a total due of $689,416.14, plus interest, Court costs, and reasonable attorney fees to be proven at trial. COUNTERCLAIM Lerov K Gordon v Marvin Window & Door Showplace. Inc. 1. - 33. Counterclaim Plaintiffs hereby incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 33 above as if fully set forth herein. 34. Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff Leroy K. Gordon also served as an employee of Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. in the capacity of selling the company's services and estimating jobs. 35. On or about June 1, 2007, Mr. Gordon left the employ of Counterclaim Defendant Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. 36. 'Thereafter, Mr. Gordon demanded his remaining vacation pay in the amount of $2,250.00, reimbursement for outstanding expenses in the amount of approximately $1,200.00, and his sales commission in the approximate amount of $24,750.00. 37. Counterclaim Defendant Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. sent Mr. Gordon a check which purported to be for unused vacation in the amount of $1,250.00, and has refused to send the remainder of the vacation pay, the expenses, and the commission. -5- 38. Marvin's failure to deliver said funds to Mr. Gordon violates the verbal agreement between the parties regarding his compensation for employment, and also violates Pennsylvania labor law regarding wages. 43 Pa. C.S. 221, et seq. WHEREFORE, Counterclaim Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court award Mr. Gordon his unpaid vacation pay, expenses, and unpaid commission, along with such other penalties, interest and attorney fees as allowed by law, and such other relief as the Court deems just and equitable in the premises. Respectfully submitted, Date: ~/ 3 ~ o~~ ~. c~^~- /°? James M. Stein, Attorney for Defendants Dick, Stein, Schemel, Wine & Frey, LLP 13 West Main Street, Suite 210 Waynesboro, Pennsylvania 17268 (717) 762-1160 PA Bar No. 84026 -6- ra ~r _; tn. ~ ~,:. E~; ; _ , ~_ ~ r IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR Civil Action -Law SHOWPLACE, INC., . Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant v. L&K RESOTRATIONS, LLC, No. 07-4081 LEROY K. CORDON and KAREN E. CORDON, Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs v. LIGHTSTYLES, LTD., . Additional Counterclaim Defendant Hon. PRAECIPE To the Prothonotary: Please file the enclosed Amended Motion to Amend Answer and Counterclaim, and forward it to the Court Administrator to be attached to the original Motion. Respectfully submitted, Date: ~{' I ~~~~ ~ s M. Stein, A orney for Defendants Dick, Stein, Schemel, Wine & Frey, LLP 13 West Main Street, Suite 210 Waynesboro, Pennsylvania 17268 (717) 762-1160 PA Bar No. 84026 PROOF OF SERVICE I HEREBY VERIFY that I have served the foregoing document upon counsel of record by depositing one (1) true and correct copy thereof in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Richard C. Snelbaker, Esquire Snelbaker & Brenneman, P.C. P.O. Box 318 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0318 Date: 9 ~I~f (0~ ~ J s M. Stein, Att rney for Defendants r IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEA5 OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant v. L&K RESOTRATIONS, LLC, LEROY K. GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs v. LIGHTSTYLES, INC., Additional Counterclaim Defendant Civil Action -Law No. 07-4081 Hon. AMENDED MOTION TO AMEND ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM COME NOW the above named Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs, by and through their undersigned attorney, and for their Amended Motion to Amend Answer and Counterclaim state to the Court as follows: 1. Counterclaim Plaintiffs filed the original Answer and Counterclaim against "Lightstyles, Inc.," believing that said name was correct. 2. Counterclaim Plaintiffs have since learned that the correct name is "Lightstyles, Ltd." 3. Consequently, the Counterclaim Plaintiffs wish to amend the Answer and Counterclaim to list the correct name of Lightstyles, Ltd. 4. On August 23, 2007, the Sheriff served the Answer and Counterclaim on Lightstyles at its registered address, but Lightstyles has not yet filed an Answer. c 5. Consequently, undersigned counsel has not notified Counterclaim Defendants, Lightstyles, of this amendment because there is not yet any counsel of record. 6. Undersigned counsel has contacted counsel for Marvin Window and Door Showplace, which counsel does not object to this motion. 7. Honorable J. Wesley Oler, Jr. has ruled on a replevin action involving these same parties and related subject matter in case number 07-3906. WHEREFORE, undersigned counsel respectfully requests that the Court allow the Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs to amend their Answer and Counterclaim in such a way that replaces all references to "Lightstyles, Inc." with "Lightstyles, Ltd." Respectfully submitted, Date: 9~i ~ ~'''~.¢/~ ~' y1o 7 James M. Stein, Attorney for Defendants Dick, Stein, Schemel, Wine & Frey, LLP 13 West Main Street, Suite 210 Waynesboro, Pennsylvania 17268 (717) 762-1160 PA Bar No. 84026 -2- t PROOF OF SERVICE I HEREBY VERIFY that I have served the foregoing document upon counsel of record by depositing one (1) true and correct copy thereof in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Richard C. Snelbaker, Esquire Counsel for Plaintiff Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc. Snelbaker & Brenneman, P.C. P.O. Box 318 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0318 Date: g`~ y ~d7 ~~~ ~' ~~~ James M. Stein, Attorney for Defendants -3- '~~ -~ =~-~ .... ...., ~, x~% ~ ~~ MARVIN WINDOW & IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF I3O0R SHOWPLACE, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA INC., . Plaintiff v. L & K RESTORATIONS, LLC; LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs v. LIGHTSTYLES, INC., Additional Counterclaim Defendant CIVIL ACTION -LAW N0.07-4081 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 24~' day of September, 2007, upon consideration of Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs' Motion To Amend Answer and Counterclaim, a Rule is hereby issued upon all other parties, to show cause why the relief requested should not be granted. RULE RETURNABLE within 20 days of service. BY THE COURT, J. esley Oler, r., J. chard C. Snelbaker, Esq. // P.O. Box 318 ~/ 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0318 Attorney for Plaintiff/ Counterclaim Defendant t/l~iilt`i~,'~5'r ~1v?~ ~'~ ~ I i ~~ SZ d~S tO~Z ~l~b'd.Usti~,~ t~.i~ ~ 3HI ~7 ~;1~~~-C~~1i~ ~mes M. Stein, Esq. 13 West Main Street Suite 210 Waynesboro, PA 172b8 Attorney for Defendants/ Counterclaim Plaintiffs ~ightstyles, Inc. 1261 Claremont Road Carlisle, PA 17015 Additional Counterclaim Defendant, pro Se :rc IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC. Plaintiff, v. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON, and KAREN E. GORDON Defendants, v. LIGHTSTYLES, INC. Additional Defendant. NO. 07-4081 CIVIL ACTION -LAW CONSENT PETITION FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS-COUNTERCLAIMANTS CGA Law Firm, P.C. and Eric Suter, Esq. respectfully petition this Court for an Order granting leave to withdraw as counsel for defendants/counterclaimants L&K Restorations, LLC, Leroy Gordon and Karen E. Gordon. As grounds therefore, petitioners state as follows: Basis for Relief Petitioners seek relief pursuant to Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas Rules of Procedure ("Local Rules") 206.1(a), which authorizes issuance of a rule to show cause "to serve the interest of justice." Parties to the Petition 2. Petitioners are CGA Law Firm, P.C. ("CGA"), having offices at 135 North George Street in York, Pennsylvania, and Eric Suter, Esq., an attorney employed by CGA. 3. Respondents are L&K Restorations, LLC ("L&K"), and Leroy and Karen Gordon (the "Gordons"), the defendants/counterclaimants in the above-captioned matter. The Gordons are the sole members of respondent L&K. {00299893/1} Statements Pursuant to Local Rule 208 2(d) 4. Pursuant to Local Rule 208.2(d), petitioners have communicated with respondents regarding the relief herein requested and respondents have expressed, in writing, their consent to an Order granting petitioners leave to withdraw. See Affidavit of Eric Suter, Esq. (Exhibit A). 5. Although it is unclear the extent to which plaintiff in the above-captioned matter would have standing to object to the relief herein requested, petitioners have, pursuant to Local Rule 208.2(d) and out of an abundance of caution, communicated with the offices of Richard Snelbaker, Esq., counsel for the plaintiff, and, on behalf of plaintiff, Attorney Snelbaker likewise consents to the relief herein requested. 6. Insofar as no party contests the relief herein requested, the instant petition is presented as a consent petition and, because the Court's determination may be made on that basis, petitioners present, pursuant to Local Rule 208.3(a)(3), a proposed order for the Court in lieu of a rule to show cause. Facts 7. The Gordons relationship with CGA began in 2007, when they approached Attorney Lawrence V. Young, Esq. in search of representation in connection with potential bankruptcy proceedings. 8. Attorney Young agreed to represent the Gordons as bankruptcy counsel and assisted the Gordons in the preparation and filing of a bankruptcy petition pursuant to Chapter 13 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. As is customary in such representations, the Gordons provided an initial retainer and were to pay Attorney Young for the balance of his services upon distribution of their bankruptcy estate. 9. At the time they filed in bankruptcy, the Gordons' assets included, among other things, real estate holdings in Arizona; a Shippensburg, Pennsylvania residence having a value in excess of $1,000,000.00; and, of course, a pecuniary interest in the counterclaims respondents press in this litigation. (00299893/1} 2 10. In connection with his representation, Attorney Young helped the Gordons craft a bankruptcy plan whereby their creditors would receive equitable treatment upon liquidation and distribution of the Gordons' assets. Among numerous other things, the Gordons' bankruptcy plan called for liquidation of the Shippensburg residence. The plan also required that any funds Leroy and Karen Gordon received as a result of this action be first dedicated to satisfaction of the Gordons' creditors in bankruptcy, without regard, of course, to whether such funds were attributable to the Gordons' personal counterclaims, or passed through to the Gordons following recovery on L&K's counterclaims. 11. From the outset of his representation, Attorney Young repeatedly advised the Gordons that, despite their wishes to the contrary, they would be unable to complete the bankruptcy process and obtain a discharge of their remaining debt while, at the same time, retaining possession of their heavily-mortgaged Shippensburg residence. 12. Although distressed by the necessity of selling their Shippensburg residence, the Gordons understood Attorney Young's advice with regard to nature and requirements of the bankruptcy process, the unavoidable liquidation and disposition of their various assets, and the ultimate distribution of their bankruptcy estate among their creditors. 13. The above-captioned litigation was ongoing at the time the Gordons approached Attorney Young and, at that time, the Gordons were represented by Attorney, James M. Stein, Esq., of Waynesboro, Pennsylvania. 14. Upon retaining Attorney Young, the Gordons asked if CGA would transition the above-captioned matter from Attorney Stein, who was billing the Gordons for services on an hourly basis, and provide them with contingent representation. 15. Attorney Young asked Attorney Eric Suter if he would be willing to represent the Gordons in this matter on a contingent basis for purposes of assisting the Gordons in the fulfillment of their bankruptcy plan, which, as noted above, contemplated that creditors would be entitled to be made whole from any funds that Leroy and Karen Gordon personally realized in connection with the counterclaims pressed in this case. {00299893/1} 16. After consideration, Attorney Suter agreed to accept the contingent representation in order to assist existing firm clients fulfill their Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan. 17. At the time Attorney Suter undertook the representation, this matter was subject to the automatic stay of the United States Bankruptcy Code. Ultimately, the parties obtained relief from stay and the matter again moved forward. Upon the eve of Mr. Gordon's first scheduled deposition, counsel for plaintiff encountered personal difficulties that delayed discovery for several months. Once counsel could resume, the plaintiff deposed Leroy Gordon and the Gordons served written discovery requests. Upon receipt of discovery responses, Attorney Suter intended to depose plaintiff's representatives and list the matter for pre-trial. 18. Between serving the written discovery and receiving plaintiff s responses, Attorney Suter met with the Gordons on Apri19, 2009 to discuss scheduling, trial and post-trial timelines, as well as the appeals process. Both Leroy and Karen Gordon attended the meeting. 19. On or about Monday, April 13, 2009, Attorney Suter received a copy of correspondence between Attorney Young and the Gordons, in which Attorney Young expressed dismay upon discovering the Gordons had defaulted on their bankruptcy plan and appeared to be actively encouraging the dismissal of their Chapter 13 proceedings. In that correspondence, Attorney Young indicated that a decision to abandon bankruptcy and walk out on fees due CGA would require the firm to evaluate its ability to continue representing the Gordons in this matter. 20. On or about April 15, 2009, the bankruptcy court formally dismissed the Gordons' bankruptcy based on their intentional and uncured default on their bankruptcy plan. 21. During the April 9, 2009 meeting between Attorney Suter and the Gordons, the Gordons did not inform Attorney Suter that they were defaulting on their bankruptcy plan, that their bankruptcy was, indeed, on the eve of dismissal, and that they had chosen to walk away from the legal fees they owed to Attorney Young and CGA. 22. To be perfectly clear, the Gordons voluntarily abandoned their bankruptcy. Apparently in reliance on the competing "advice" of an attorney handling the Gordons' unrelated mortgage fraud claim, the Gordons set out to "save" the Shippensburg residence by undermining {00299893/1} 4 the realtor retained to sell the property, subsequently defaulting on their bankruptcy plan, and purposefully exiting Chapter 13 to avoid the then-looming sale. Simply stated, the bankruptcy's dismissal was not the product of financial incapacity; it was the Gordons' goal. 23. Based on their conduct, it has become clear that the Gordons do not respect the competent legal advice they have received from Attorney Young and CGA. Indeed, the Gordons have actively and repeatedly worked at cross-purposes with their counsel. Standing alone, the fundamental breakdown intrust, respect, and communication, which frustrated CGA's efforts to provide the Gordons with effective representation, warrants CGA's withdrawal from this matter. As explained below, however, that fundamental breakdown does not stand alone. 24. At the time they abandoned their already-protracted bankruptcy proceedings, the Gordons' financial obligation to Attorney Young and CGA, i. e., legal fees they had incurred as a result of Attorney Young's bankruptcy representation, reached in excess of $25,000.00. 25. The Gordons have not proposed any means by which they might satisfy their considerable financial obligations to CGA and the firm harbors no illusions regarding its ultimate ability to collect for the value of the many services Attorney Young provided. 26. The Gordons' decision to abandon their bankruptcy and turn their back on the substantial debt they owe Attorney Young and CGA has placed the firm in the position of an adversarial creditor and compels Attorney Suter and CGA to petition for leave to withdraw from representation of the Gordons in this matter. 27. Not only does the manifest conflict presented by CGA's adversarial debtor/creditor relationship with the Gordons necessitate withdraw, but also the very purpose for which Attorney Suter and CGA undertook representation of the Gordons in this matter has been vitiated. It was made clear from the outset that Attorney Suter and CGA took this case based on the Gordons then-existing relationship with the firm's bankruptcy department and strictly for purposes of assisting the Gordons in fulfillment of their bankruptcy plan and objectives. 28. Neither Attorney Suter nor CGA would have accepted this matter on a contingent basis had this matter then been what it has now become-a commercial dispute involving parties (00299893/1) that have no independent relationship with the firm. The firm and its lawyers have only so many hours available for dedication to contingent fee matters and, but for special circumstances that no longer exist-indeed, circumstances that the Gordons intentionally altered to CGA's material disadvantage-this case would not have qualified for contingent representation. 29. The Gordons have indicated they will seek successor counsel and have requested that their file be made available to them as soon as possible. 30. Attorney Suter and the firm will, of course, assist the Gordons in the transition of this matter to successor counsel and will take all reasonable steps to ensure that the transition process is as speedy and as smooth as practicable. 31. As a result of choices the Gordons have made, there is no longer any bankruptcy plan to fulfill and Attorney Young and CGA have been left holding the bag for $25,000.00 in legal fees that would otherwise have been paid upon distribution of the bankruptcy estate. 32. The Gordons enjoyed the benefit of Attorney Young's representation in the forms of protection from their many creditors for roughly ayear-and-a-half and skillful assistance in the liquidation of assets held by the bankruptcy estate. 33. As set forth above, the Gordons choices were contrary to CGA's advice and counsel, have created an adversarial debtor/creditor relationship between the Gordons and CGA and, sadly, have been equally adverse to the Gordons' personal financial interests. Even so, CGA recognizes the Gordons' right to make their own choices. CGA and its attorneys are, however, likewise entitled to make a choice. For all the reasons set forth above, that choice-to the limited extent it is a choice at all-is to petition this court for leave to withdraw as counsel. (00299893/1} 6 WHEREFORE, petitioners CGA Law Firm, P.C. and Eric Suter, Esq. respectfully request that the Court issue an Order granting petitioners leave to withdraw as counsel for defendants/counterclaimants in the above-captioned action and any and all such other relief as the Court may deem justice to require. Dated: May 7, 2009 CGA La irm Eric Su er, Esq. .202017) 135 North George Street York, PA 17401 esuter@cgalaw.com Tel: 717-848-4900 Fax: 717-843-9039 (00299893/I} 7 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC. Plaintiff, v. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON, and KAREN E. GORDON Defendants, v. LIGHTSTYLES, INC. Additional Defendant. NO. 07-4081 CIVIL ACTION -LAW AFFIDAVIT OF CONCURRENCE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ss. COUNTY OF YORK ) ERIC SUTER, ESQUIRE, counsel for defendants/counterclaimants in the above captioned matter, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that on Tuesday, May 5, 2009, I forwarded, via electronic mail, to respondents L&K Restorations, LLC, Leroy Gordon and Karen E. Gordon a copy of the foregoing petition, in substantially similar form to that filed herewith, inquiring as to whether respondents would consent to the relief therein requested, i. e. , an Order granting myself, and my firm, CGA Law Firm, P.C., leave to withdraw as counsel in the above captioned matter. Later that same evening, I received respondents' reply via electronic mail in which respondents expressed their consent to the relief requested. On Wednesday, May 6, 2009, I placed a telephone call to the offices of Richard Snelbaker, Esq., counsel for plaintiff in the above-captioned action. Shortly thereafter, Attorney Snelbaker returned my call and confirmed that plaintiff likewise had no objection and consented {00299893/1) to the relief requested in the foregoing petition, i. e. , an Order granting leave to withdraw as counsel for defendants/counterclaimants in the above-captioned matter. Further affiant sayeth naught. Eric Suter, Esq (No. 202017) CGA LAW FI , P.C. 135 North George Street York, PA 17401 Tel: (717) 848-4900 Fax: (717) 843-9039 Email: esuter@cgalaw.com Sworn and subscribed to before me this ~ day of May, 2009. ~ ~~C~~ 1t~C~t.Q Notary Pub ' NowtlA~ sou SUSAN J WALTEMNt~ Notary PubIIC YORK CITY, YORK COtNd1Y ~Ay Cgnmksion Expira~ Jun 1 S, 2010 {00299893/1} CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 7th day of May 2009, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petition for Leave to Withdraw as Counsel for Defendants/Counterclaimants has been served via first-class mail, postage prepaid, upon the following: Leroy Gordon Karen E. Gordon L&K Restorations, LLC 186 Booz Road Shippensburg, PA 17257 Respondents Richard C. Snelbaker, Esquire SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. 44 West Main Street P.O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0318 Counsel for Plaintiff CGA LAW FIRM Eric Suter, Esq. {ooz99893~, } t ~ r~'' ~~ r; r a ° ~ 4 r ~ ~Lr'a`~'-~ ~ ,. i ~~,;; MAY ~ ~' ZOtI~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC. Plaintiff, v. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON, and KAREN E. GORDON NO. 07-4081 CIVIL ACTION -LAW Defendants, v. LIGHTSTYLES, INC. Additional Defendant. ~ ORDER And now, this i3~day of May, 2009, upon consideration of the foregoing Petition for Leave to Withdraw as Counsel for Defendants/Counterclaimants, and on the basis of all parties' noted consent to the relief therein requested, it is hereby ORDERED that Eric Suter, Esq. and CGA Law Firm, P.C. shall be, and hereby are, granted leave to withdraw as attorneys for defendants/counterclaimants L&K Restorations, LLC, Leroy Gordon and Karen E. Gordon in the above-captioned matter. Notice to: Eric Suter, Esq. Leroy Gordon Richard C. Snelbaker, Esq. CGA LAW FIRM, P.C. Karen E. Gordon SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. 135 North George Street L&K Restorations, LLC 44 West Main Street York, PA 17401 186 Booz Road P.O. Box 318 Petitioners Shippensburg, PA 17257 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0318 Respondents Counsel for Plaintiff ,,u,~.u.~-, ,rv~-~,.,,,P..~( 5 - i 3-a 9 (00299893/IJ By the Court: 3- J ~ ~,/ ~Q~9 ~ir~`~ ~ ~ I~~~ ~~~ } C~.~ftiz ~;~j j`,~, r'~ w KOPE 8~ ASSOCIATES, LLC BY: SHANE B. KOPE, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY I.D. 92207 395 ST. JOHNS CHURCH RD CAMP HILL, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 sbkope@kopelaw.com Attorney for Defendant MAR\/CN Wt~tDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff vs. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON, and KAREN E. GORDON Defendants, tN TF#E COURT QF" CO~IV!'M~t~' PLEAS' CUMBERLAND COUNTY; PENNSYLVAf~tfA' NO. 2007-4081 CIVIL ACTION -LAW vs. LIGHTSTYLES, INC. Additional Defendant PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF' APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter my appearance on behalf L&K Restorations,.. Leroy Gordon and Karen Gordon, Defendants, in the above-captioned matter. ___ DATE ,ESQUIRE #92207 5 St. Johns Camp Hitl,, PA- KOPE 8 ASSOCIATES, LLC BY: SHANE B. KOPE, ESQUIRE` ATTORNEY I.D. 92207 395 ST. JOHNS CHURCH RD CAMP HILL, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 sbkope@kopelaw.com MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SFFEyWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff vs. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON, and KAREN E. GORDON Defendants, vs. LIGHTSTYLES, INC. Additional Defendant Attorney for Defendant IN THE COURT OFD COMMON'PLEAS CUMBERLAND CO~i:JI~tTY PEf~I?~ISI/~VA~6A~~ ` , NO. 2007-4081 CIVIL ACTION -LAW CERTIFICa-TE OF SERVICE I, Shane B. Kope, Esq., do hereby certify that on this 2"d day of October, 2009, I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe for Entry of Appearance via regular U.S. First Class mail, postage prepaid, addressed ass follows: Richard C. Snelbaker, Esquire Snelbaker & Brenneman.,. P`.C`. 44 West Main St. P.O. Box 348 M anic 53' w ~ ,,.~Fiane B: ope, Esq_ ;%'" I.D. 92207 ~_ 4660 Trindle Roa ,Suite 201 - -- a 1 (717) 761-7573 FiL~[)-fir C3F ?N~ ~~G`3Ti~Y 209 DST -6 PPS ~ ~ 38 KOPE ~ ASSOCIATES, LLC JULIE WEHNERT, ESQ. Attorney ID 307900 395 Saint Johns Church Road, Suite 101 Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 jwehnert@kopelaw.com MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff vs. Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2007-4081 L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON, and KAREN E. GORDON :CIVIL ACTION -LAW Defendants, vs. LIGHTSTYLES, INC. Additional Defendant PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter my appearance on behalf L&K Restorations, Leroy Gordon and Karen Gordon, Defendants, in the above-captioneder. ~ ~ ~ DATE < l IE WEHNERT, E QUIF 5 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Supreme Court ID# 307900 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Julie Wehnert, Esquire do hereby certify that on this 9t" day of November, 2009, I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe for Entry of Appearance via regular U.S. First Class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Richard C. Snelbaker, Esquire Snelbaker & Brenneman, P.C. 44 West Main St. P.O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC B ` ~ ulie Wehnert, Esq. '~ I.D. 307900 395 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 761-7573 Attorney for Plaintiff 2C~': ~~~'J' C ~' i ~ ~ ;~~ 0 r"~ ~ rr-Yi FL~G~4r~~~~ ~T~uRY Zd~Q ~~n~ j ~ ~~'~ 2' ~~ f ;n . ~~ ~~,;J~ ' MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC. Plaintiff v. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants v. LIGHTSTYLES, INC. Additional Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2007 - 4081 CIVIL TERM PRAECIPE FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE To the Prothonotary: Please withdraw my appearance on behalf of the defendants, L&K Restorations, LLC, Leroy Gordon and Karen E. Gordon, in the above captioned case. Respectfully submitted, KOPE & ASSOCIATES, LLC 395 Saint Johns Church Road, Suite 101 Camp Hill, PA 17011 By: Ju Wehnert, Esq., Atto ney ID 307900 By: ~/ ~ha~Kope, Attorney ID 92207 /2OLU Date: ~~~~~~~~ MAR i 4 2010 ~kiNlN & i1~cKN1GNt AW OFfI~ES PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE To the Prothonotary: Please enter my appearance on behalf of the defendants, L&K Restorations, LLC, Leroy Gordon and Karen E. Gordon, in the above captioned case. Respectfully submitted, IRWIN & MCIGHT, P.C. By: Marcus A. cKnight, I, squire 60 West P mfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 1 3 (717) 249-2353 Supreme Court I.D. No. 25476 Date: ~,~. ~~ /~ rd 2 MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC. Plaintiff v. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants v. LIGHTSTYLES, INC. Additional Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2007 - 4081 CIVIL TERM CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esq., hereby certify that a copy of attached document was served upon the following by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States mail, First Class, postage prepaid in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, on the date referenced below and addressed as follows: Richard C. Snelbaker, Esquire Snelbaker & Brenneman, P.C. 44 West Main Street P. O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 IRWIN & McKNIGHT, P.C. ~~~~ By: Marcus ~ McKnf, III, Esquire 60 West omfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-2353 Supreme Court I.D. No. 25476 Date: (f ~ .~, %( ~0 1d 3 ~~ PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR TRIAL (Must be typewritten and submitted in triplicate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Please list the following case: ^ for JURY trial at the next term of civil court. ^X for trial without a jury. CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption must be stated in full) MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., The trial list will be called on AUGUST 31, 2010 Trials commence on SEPT~IBER 20, 2010 (other) (Plaintiff] vs. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON AND KAREN E. GORDON, (Defendant) vs. Pretrials will be held on SEPTEMBER 8, 2010 (Briefs are due S days before pretrials LIGHTSTYLES, INC. No.2007 -4081 CIVIL Term (Additional Defendant) Indicate the attorney who will try case for the party who files this praecipe: MARCUS A. McKNIGHT, III, ESQ., IRWIN & McKNIGHT, P.C. Indicate trial counsel for other parties if known: RICHARD SNELBAKER, ESQ., SNELBAKER & This case is ready for trial. Date: JULY 15 , 2010 O~ ~~s ~ ~,e~ ~osy9 {ZfG~1 ~c/saw Print Name: C3 '" C ._.. . :~ ~, ca r 'T:l ~=' t~ --i ~'t : r c_ _~ r- ~ ~ _ ,, r-, ~ -~ ;: . ~ ~-_ CAS -~ c= , (check one) ® Civil Action -Law ^ Appeal from arbitration P.C. Attorney for: DEFENDANTS r_. ORDER OF COURT Y ;?"„ ~_~. ~' f-• o ._ 1 AND NOW, this 5th day of August, 2010, the Counsel for Defendant having MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., PLAINTIFF V. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY CORDON AND KAREN CORDON, DEFENDANTS V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : ra ,.,, • C_. c, :-- ~ ~ , . ~ --- ~ ,~ ; ~ _ LIGHTSTYLES, INC., ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT NO. 07-4081 CIVIL IN RE: NONtiIURY TRIAL requested that the above captioned matter be listed for aNon-Jury Trial and Plaintiff's Counsel having advised the Court that Defendant Leroy Kenneth Gordon f/d/b/a L & K Restorations, LLC, filed for chapter 13 bankruptcy case on March 2, 2010, in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DIRECTED that the case will not be listed for Non-Jury Trial until Defendant provides this Court with an Order from the Bankruptcy Court lifting the automatic stay. By the Court, ~~ M. L. Ebert, Jr., •.. ~th Brenneman, Esquire Richard Snelbaker, Esquire Attorneys for Plaintiff arcus McKnight, Esquire Attorney for Defendant bas ~P ~ ~ s ,~,,~.~ Lam, a~~~rv --.~''1 t .ti MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., PLAINTIFF V. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON AND KAREN GORDON, DEFENDANTS V. LIGHTSTYLES, INC., ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 07-4081 CIVIL IN RE: NON-JURY TRIAL ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 10th day of August, 2010, the non-jury trial in the above referenced case has been assigned to this Court. Prior to setting an actual trial date, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DIRECTED that the parties in this case file apre-trial memorandum with the Court on or before September 30, 2010, in the following format: I. A concise statement of factual issues to be decided at trial. II. A list of witnesses the party intends to call at trial along with a concise statement of their anticipated testimony. III. A list of all exhibits each party anticipates presenting at trial. IV. A statement of any legal issues each party anticipates being raised at trial along with copies of any cases which may be relevant to resolution of the stated issue. V. An estimate of the anticipated time needed for the party to present its case. •i Upon receipt and review of these memorandums, the Court will set a trial date for this case. By the Court, ~, M. L. Ebert, Jr., `Keith Brenneman, Esquire Richard Snelbaker, Esquire Attorneys for Plaintiff '~ Marcus McKnight, Esquire Attorney for Defendant bas ~p~cs ~.,lcc~ ~/rr~iA ~~ MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF SHOWPLACE, INC., CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION - LAW vs. NO. 07-3906 CIVIL L. & K. RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. NO. 07-4471 CIVIL GORDON, Defendants MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF SHOWPLACE., INC., CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION - LAW vs. L. & K. RESTORATIONS, LLC, NO. 07-4081 CIVIL LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. . n GORDON, Defendants x' U3 • vs. : ? -?.dd LIGHTSTYLES, INC., Additional Defendant C M _1i IN RE: NONJURY TRIAL ORDER AND NOW, this Z (..'day of August, 2010, following conference with counsel in Chambers, the above-captioned cases are consolidated for the purpose of trial. Trial without a jury shall be conducted on Thursday, November 4, 2010, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, PA. BY THE COURT, Kevin AlHess, P. J. I w A I ichard C. Snelbaker, Esquire eith Brenneman, Esquire For the Plaintiff Mrcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire or the Defendants Court Administrator Am ri L AUG f ? + MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC. Plaintiff V. L&K RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON. Defendants V. LIGHTSTYLES, INC., Additional Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2007 - 4081 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW • x c c? cil:1) C jrn ORDER OF COURT `' -c AND NOW, this day of August 2010, upon the consideration of the Defendants" Motion to Make Rule to Show Cause Absolute, it is hereby ORDERED AND DECREED that the Rule issued on September 24, 2007, is hereby made absolute and the Motion filed by Marcus A. McKnight, III. Esq. of Irwin & McKnight, P.C., is hereby granted substituting "Lightstyles, Inc." with "Lightstyles, Ltd." in the pleadings and caption in this case. BY THE COURT: Oler, Jr., Judge ' Distributio List: J Richard C. Snelbaker, Esq. Keith O. Brenneman, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiffs / Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esq. Attorney for Defendants, L&K Restorations, LLC and Leroy and Karen Gordon co t ?S rY?ZI MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff V. L & K RESTORATIONS, LLC; LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, : Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs V. LIGHTSTYLES, INC., Additional Counterclaim Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-4081 CIVIL TERM IN RE: DEFENDANTS/COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO AMEND ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM ORDER OF COURT ro t?: 19 { CJ f t' - ; -i3 c C - :Q C_ =+ Z AND NOW, this 10`h Day of September 2010, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion To Make Rule To Show Cause Absolute, and of the attached letter from Plaintiffs counsel, Keith O. Brenneman, Esq., and it appearing that Plaintiff did file an Answer to the September 24, 2007, Rule, the August 31, 2010, Order of Court granting Defendants' motion is vacated. A brief hearing on Defendants' Motion To Amend Answer and Counterclaim and Plaintiff's Answer thereto is scheduled for Wednesday, November 10, 2010, at 11:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 1, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. BY THE COURT, ?r J. 1esley Oler, ., J. ichard C. Snelbaker, Esq. Keith O. Brenneman, Esq. P.O. Box 318 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0318 Attorney for Plaintiff/ Counterclaim Defendant arcus A. McKnight, III, Esq. 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Attorney for Defendants/ Counterclaim Plaintiffs ghtstyles, Inc. 1261 Claremont Road Carlisle, PA 17015 Additional Counterclaim Defendant, pro Se : rc co o,-Es rrk (LLL 9/1,4/1a --Xyy) MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff VS. L.&K. RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON and KAREN E GORDON, Defendants MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff vs. L.&K. RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW : NO. 07-3906 CIVIL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 07-4081 CIVIL Irk VERDICTS AND NOW, A1Vvi,., &r . /Z* , 2010, after consolidated trial without jury of both I above captioned actions on November 4, 2010, the undersigned trial judge finds as follows in the I following cases: No. 07-3906: • On Plaintiffs action to recover property by action of replevin, the Verdict is for the Plaintiff and against the Defendants; and it is further ordered and directed that LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. I 1 1 Plaintiffs bond entered on July 3, 2007, is hereby cancelled and the principals of said bond and the surety therein are hereby released and discharged from any further liability to Defendants. • On Defendants' counterclaim for monetary damages, the Verdict is for the Plaintiff and against the Defendants. No. 07-4081: • On Plaintiffs action to recover monetary damages, the Verdict is for the Plaintiff and against the Defendants in the amount of $72,628.05 less the set-off amount of $2,974.00 as allowed in the Defendants' counterclaim below for a net amount due Plaintiff of $69,654.05. • On Defendants' counterclaim to recover monetary damages, the Verdict is for Defendant Leroy Gordon and against the Plaintiff in the amount of $2,974.00 on Leroy Gordon's claims for unpaid expenses and one week's vacation pay, said amount to be deducted (set-off) from the $72,628.05 as found above. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 227.4, the Prothonotary shall, upon praecipe, enter judgments on LAW OPFICES SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN. P.C. the above decisions if no motions for post-trial relief have been filed under Pa.R.C.P. 227.1 I within ten (10) days after notice of filing this decision. By the Court, 4( 0 =f AINV i e c 2 V Richard C. Snelbaker, Esquire o/ Keith Brenneman, Esquire For the Plaintiff Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire For the Defendants Court Administrator :rlm ll f i?i `? COP; es rtia led MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff VS. L.&K. RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLfA F CUMBERLAND COUNTY41 I ?MY ANIA L rrn o CIVIL ACTION -LAW ,nr- -urn r'3 -<> ,o ea° NO. 07-3906 CIVIL a) = ° XC z , MF3 5a: no O MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff VS. L.&K. RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 07-4081 CIVIL/ s ?y o P"Ljy PRAECIPE TO ENTER JUDGMENT 0 a ?n 6'" PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 227.4 np'' ,?_((, /Yo?DdS Y..QtIG?. TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter judgment in favor of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants in the above actions in accordance with the Verdicts entered by the trial Judge November 12, 2010. t SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P. C. By: 1 Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Date: November 29, 2010 Attorneys for Plaintiff AND NOW, this day of November, 2010 judgment is hereby entered in favor LAW oFFicES of the Plaintiff and against Defendants in accordance with the above. SNELBAKER SC BRENNEMAN, P.G. f ?d P 8, Prot onotary CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am on this date serving a true and correct copy of Praecipe to Enter Judgment upon the attorneys for Defendants by sending the same by regular first-class mail, postage paid, addressed to: Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire Irwin & McKnight, P. C. 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 By: Date: November 29, 2010 SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. iGU-- Keith O. Brenneman, Esquire 44 W. Main Street P. O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717)697-8528 Attorneys for Plaintiff LAW OFFICES SNELSAKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. ! ?s MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff VS. L.&K. RESTORATIONS, LLC, GORDON, Defendants MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff VS. L.&K. RESTORATIONS, LLC, LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, Defendants : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 07-3906 CIVIL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW NO. 07-4081 CIVIL VERDICTS AND NOW, ,v®v4 bw 2010, after consolidated trial without jury of both I above captioned actions on November 4, 2010, the undersigned trial judge finds as follows in the following cases: No. 07-3906: On Plaintiffs action to recover property by action of replevin, the Verdict is for the Plaintiff and against the Defendants; and it is further ordered and directed that LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER & BRENNEMAN.f.C. Plaintiffs bond entered on July 3, 2007, is hereby cancelled and the principals of said bond and the surety therein are hereby released and discharged from any further liability to Defendants. • On Defendants' counterclaim for monetary damages, the Verdict is for the Plaintiff and against the Defendants. • On Plaintiffs action to recover monetary damages, the Verdict is for the Plaintiff and against the Defendants in the amount of $72,628.05 less the set-off amount of $2,974.00 as allowed in the Defendants' counterclaim below for a net amount due Plaintiff of $69,654.05. • On Defendants' counterclaim to recover monetary damages, the Verdict is for Defendant Leroy Gordon and against the Plaintiff in the amount of $2,974.00 on Leroy Gordon's claims for unpaid expenses and one week's vacation pay, said amount to be deducted (set-off) from the $72,628.05 as found above. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 227.4, the Prothonotary shall, upon praecipe, enter judgments on j the above decisions if no motions for post-trial relief have been filed under Pa.R.C.P. 227.1 I within ten (10) days after notice of filing this decision. By the Court, I LAIN OFFICES SNEL19AKER & BRENNEMAN, P.C. 0 CM f--! i2 3 92 ? i UL, ..- 2 MARVIN WINDOW & DOOR SHOWPLACE, INC., Plaintiff, vs. L & K RESTORATIONS, LLC; LEROY GORDON and KAREN E. GORDON, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION -LAW Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs, vs. NO: 07-4081 CIVIL TERM LIGHTSTYLES, INC., Additional Counterclaim Defendant ANSWER TO RULE TO SHOW CAUSE RE DEFENDANTS'/ COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO AMEND ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Marvin Window & Door Showplace, Inc., by its attorneys. Snelbaker & Brenneman, P.C., and responds to the Rule to Show Cause issued on September 27, 2007 on Motion to Amend Answer and Counterclaim filed by Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs as follows: 1. Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs have failed to comply with the Rules of Civil Procedure concerning joinder of additional defendants (Pa. R.C.P. 2251 et seq.) in purporting to have joined Lightstyles, Inc. or Lightstyles, Ltd. 2. Neither Lightstyles, Inc. nor Lightstyles, Ltd. has been joined as an additional Defendant in this action. 3. Since the purported additional defendant has not been made a party herein, the LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER &' BRENNEMAN. F.C. Motion to Amend the Answer and Counterclaim against such non-party is a nullity and should be dismissed. WHEREFORE, Defendants'/Counterclaim Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend Answer and Counterclaim should be dismissed and the Rule to Show Cause thereon vacated. SNELBA & BRENNEMAN, P.C. By icha C. Snelbaker, Esquire 44 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 (717) 697-8528 Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: December 11, 2008 Law o~icEs SNELBAKER 8C BRENNEMAN, P.C. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this date serving a copy of the above Answer to Rule to Show ause Re Defendants'/Counterclaim Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend Answer and Counterclaim the person named below by first-class mail, postage paid, as addressed as follows: Eric Suter, Esquire CGA Law Firm 135 North George Street York, PA 17257 (Attorney for Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs) a.GU-c/ Richard C. Snelbaker, Esquire Snelbaker & Brenneman, P.C. 44 West Main Street P.O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0318 Attorneys for Plaintiff December 11, 2008 LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER EC BRENNEMAN, P.C. r ~' ~: 3 ~~ ~,, ~.,.~ .t_ • ~~ } ~ ~' .. _~ ~~ C.JT ::C3 (~''~ °•<